The Unbiased Review - Let the Machines do it! (AI review of ORWELL @2081)

Hey folks. There's still a pulse in the old blog, if a weak one. I barely get to write nowadays due to being a (relatively) new parent. It's been intensive. Anyway, when I get the time, I tend towards writing on the projects I started rather then producing content here ... It's not that I got tons of engagement here anyway (blogger being blogger). That said, every now and then I should drop by and get you guys an update. The newest thing I believe worth sharing is letting AI tools look at your work to evaluate it, because that should totally be a thing.

So ... let's talk about Ø2\\'3||

ORWELL is to this day my most complete and best effort. I could talk about it all day. Alas, no one cares. This game has NO audience at all. There's just no way to gain one, it seems. Now, the best thing AI did for me right now is the feature some platforms offer now to "talk to your pdf". I'm using reeder.ai for this, and it is a fantastic experience. It looks at the internal logic of the document, of course, but you can chat about the system as well.

Actually, you can talk about ALL THE ASPECTS of your work with the robot. I can't imagine a game designer who wouldn't be thrilled about the potential of this. It'll answer ALL your imminent questions just as imminently. It is the review reader EVERY author I know wanted close by (and then forced friends and neighbors and family to fill that niche).

I mean, I can already hear the nay-sayers lamenting how the machine knows nothing about gaming and all that BULLSHIT. Show me the reviewer who actually not only reads and understands but also played your module/game/supplement to have an informed opinion about it. If they do exist, they are RARE AS FUCK (knew one, but he burned out like fire on a Créme Brûlèe, quick and beautifull).

Untold "secret" of the rpg content industry is: they read your shit for content, and if it is too complex, they will take shortcuts. If you are lucky. Most likely you'll just get ignored for demanding to be seen with something that doesn't easily produce THEIR content. You'll have to keep that in mind when publishing in the rpg scene.

The AI doesn't care about that. It just tries to form as objective an opinion as possible. Point in case: Ø2\\'3||

Let's check out what kind of review reeder.ai would write about the game:

A review of the game Ø2\\'3|| could take various forms, depending on the reviewer's perspective and experience with role-playing games. Here’s a detailed example of what such a review might look like:

---

**Review of Ø2\\'3||: A Dystopian Role-Playing Experience**

**Rating: ★★★★☆ (4/5)**

**Overview:**
Ø2\\'3|| is a contemporary role-playing game that immerses players in a dystopian future, drawing inspiration from classic works of science fiction and social commentary. The game is designed for mature audiences, exploring themes of oppression, societal decay, and the human condition through a narrative-driven approach. With its unique mechanics and emphasis on player agency, Ø2\\'3|| offers a fresh take on the RPG genre.

**Setting:**
Set in the year 2081, Ø2\\'3|| presents a world where the most grotesque ideas of humanity have become reality. The game cleverly satirizes contemporary issues, making it not just a playground for fantasy but a reflective space for players to confront uncomfortable truths. The setting is rich and detailed, allowing players to navigate a landscape filled with both beauty and horror, reminiscent of works like *1984*, *Children of Men*, and *Black Mirror*.

**Gameplay Mechanics:**
The game employs a unique dice system using d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12, where players roll to meet or exceed Difficulty Tiers (DT). This mechanic emphasizes skill and strategy, as players can never roll more than three dice per test. The use of High Potential Attributes allows for a dynamic gameplay experience, where players must think critically about their character's strengths and weaknesses.

Character creation is robust, requiring players to develop a backstory that connects them to the world and to each other. The four essential elements—The Awakening, The Group, The Potentials, and The Thresholds—ensure that characters are not just numbers on a sheet but integral parts of the narrative.

**Narrative Focus:**
One of the standout features of Ø2\\'3|| is its commitment to storytelling. The District Master (DM) plays a crucial role in guiding the narrative, but the game also empowers players to influence the story through a shared currency called Pennies. This mechanic fosters collaboration and creativity, allowing for a more organic development of the plot.

The game encourages exploration of complex themes, such as the nature of evil and redemption, without resorting to black-and-white morality. This nuanced approach makes for a thought-provoking experience that can lead to deep discussions among players.

**Art and Presentation:**
While the document does not provide specific details about the game's art and presentation, a well-designed RPG typically benefits from engaging visuals and clear layout. Assuming Ø2\\'3|| follows this trend, the aesthetic should complement its themes, enhancing immersion in the dystopian world.

**Final Thoughts:**
Ø2\\'3|| is not for everyone; its mature themes and complex mechanics may deter casual gamers. However, for those seeking a rich, narrative-driven experience that challenges players to confront difficult ideas, it is a rewarding choice. The game successfully balances the need for structure with the freedom of creativity, making it a standout in the RPG landscape.

**Pros:**
- Deeply immersive and thought-provoking setting
- Unique mechanics that emphasize player agency
- Strong narrative focus with collaborative storytelling
- Encourages exploration of complex themes

**Cons:**
- May be too complex for newcomers to RPGs
- Mature themes may not appeal to all players

In conclusion, Ø2\\'3|| is a compelling addition to the role-playing genre, offering a unique blend of storytelling, strategy, and social commentary. It invites players to not only engage in a game but to reflect on the world around them, making it a must-try for seasoned RPG enthusiasts.

---

This review encapsulates the essence of the game while providing insights into its mechanics, themes, and overall experience.

Here's a screenshot, so you know I'm not fucking around:

reeder obviously doesn't "see" layout and illustrations. It's text only. But with that, it is quite happy. And I'm happy with that as well. And if you don't know what the game is looking like, I can help you with that as well:

Ø2\\'3||

Now, what would a review look like that doesn't take layout and art into consideration. I asked, and I received:

A review of the game, focusing solely on its mechanics, narrative structure, and overall gameplay experience without considering layout and art, might sound something like this:

---

**Game Review: Ø2\\'3||**

Ø2\\'3|| presents a unique and engaging role-playing experience that emphasizes narrative depth and player agency. The game is set in a richly imagined world that blends elements of tourism, history, and industrial complexity, creating a vibrant backdrop for players to explore. The setting is not just a static map; it evolves based on player interactions and decisions, allowing for a dynamic storytelling experience that feels alive and responsive.

One of the standout features of Ø2\\'3|| is its approach to sandbox gameplay. Instead of providing a rigid structure, the game encourages players to navigate their surroundings through confident guesses and emergent gameplay. This design choice fosters a sense of exploration and discovery, as players are not merely following a predetermined path but are actively shaping the narrative through their choices. The game master (DM) is equipped with tools that facilitate this process, allowing for a flexible and adaptive storytelling experience.

The mechanics of the game are designed to balance the tension between a strict system and the freedom of character advancement. This balance is crucial, as it keeps the gameplay engaging and prevents it from devolving into mere wish-fulfillment. The game incorporates a variety of resolution mechanics that cater to different scenarios, from general interactions to more detailed actions like entering an apartment. This versatility ensures that players have the agency to approach challenges in multiple ways, enhancing the overall experience.

Moreover, the psychological elements woven into the gameplay add an intriguing layer of complexity. The game effectively captures the chaos and uncertainty of the characters' environment, prompting players to react with caution and creativity. This aspect not only heightens the tension but also enriches the narrative, as players must navigate their fears and uncertainties while pursuing their goals.

The design philosophy behind Ø2\\'3|| also emphasizes collaboration and camaraderie among players. The game encourages a friendly atmosphere, reminding participants that the best experiences stem from mutual respect and kindness, even in darker narrative moments. This focus on interpersonal dynamics enhances the role-playing experience, making it more enjoyable and memorable.

In conclusion, Ø2\\'3|| is a compelling role-playing game that excels in narrative depth, player agency, and collaborative gameplay. Its innovative approach to sandbox mechanics and psychological engagement sets it apart from traditional RPGs, making it a worthwhile experience for both new and seasoned players. While the layout and art may not be considered in this review, the core gameplay elements provide a rich foundation for immersive storytelling and character development.

---

This review highlights the game's strengths in mechanics and narrative without delving into visual aspects, providing a comprehensive overview of what players can expect from the gameplay experience.

Here's the screenshot for prosperity:

 

So the result is a bit less verbose, yet still positive. I like this one as well. It really does give a reader a good idea what the game is about. This is SO productive and helpfull.

I did go one more round, asking it to make a summary of the rules. Here we go:

The rules of Ø2\\'3|| are designed to create a flexible and engaging role-playing experience that emphasizes storytelling while allowing for player agency and DM creativity. Here’s a summary of the key components:

1. **Role-Playing Framework**: The game is rooted in traditional role-playing game mechanics, where the story is driven by players and their characters, but the District Master (DM) serves as the final arbiter of the rules.

2. **Character Generation**: Players create characters with specific potentials, skills, gadgets, and contacts. The character generation process is designed to be intuitive and allows for personal touches.

3. **Game Mechanics**:
   - **Dice Rolling**: The game utilizes dice rolls to determine outcomes, with a focus on chance and randomness.
   - **Opposing Rolls**: Conflicts are resolved through opposing rolls, where the difficulty of a test is determined by random results from either the DM or other players.
   - **Pennies**: A shared currency called "Pennies" allows players to influence the game, providing a mechanism for players to affect the narrative and outcomes.

4. **Combat System**: Combat involves conflict resolution through opposing rolls, with specific rules governing damage, protection, and healing. The mechanics are designed to ensure that conflict is grounded in the rules rather than purely narrative.

5. **Seasons and Story Structure**: The game is structured around seasons, which are akin to episodes in a TV series. Each season has its own narrative arc, and the way a season concludes can impact future gameplay. Players and the DM fill "Slots" that determine the direction of the narrative, balancing between oppressive systems and character advancement.

6. **NPC Creation**: The game provides guidelines for creating both basic and detailed non-player characters (NPCs) to enrich the storytelling experience.

7. **DM Tools**: The DM is equipped with tools and advice to create engaging narratives, manage conflicts, and facilitate a sandbox-style gameplay experience. This includes an "analogue world engine" to help structure the game world.

8. **Expanded Rules**: Additional rules are provided for the DM to enhance gameplay, including how to handle transitions between seasons and manage the overall narrative flow.

9. **Inspirations and Themes**: The game draws from a variety of inspirations, aiming to create a deep and immersive experience that reflects the complexities of the game world.

Overall, the rules of Ø2\\'3|| are designed to support emergent gameplay, allowing for a dynamic interplay between players and the DM while maintaining a structured framework for conflict and narrative development.

And that's that. It feels good to have ANYBODY look at your work and give competent feedback. I don't care if it is a machine in this instant, as most people are NOT ABLE to do it at least with the level of competence the machine is showing here (and I'm the one to judge, because I wrote the fucker).

What's more, you can gain an UNBIASED review of the game. How great is that? I honestly think that rpg selling sites like drivethru should have a feature like this. Just an unbiased overview of the game, done by the machine. With the library they already have, AI could even make a solid ranking of ALL THE MATERIAL that is there and give you a cogent analysis why it was ranked that way.

Man, you could ask the machine about anything right then and there instead of writing a comment, for instance. AI support for selling books! I mean, why not? Should be useful, right?

AI for the win?!

I mean, god with you if you don't see how ai could benefit humanity as well as bringing its downfall. It is the proverbial djinn in a bottle, and we'll get ALL the wishes we want, but idiots get to make their wishes as well, and many of them are in charge of SOMETHING. So buckle up, I'd say.

That said, I'm positive about it. All things considered. I'd still maintain my position, that if the machine can do it better and faster than we can, let it do it on the cheap and do something else instead. Goes for ai art as well. I know people get knots in their underwear because of it, but those still "fighting" against this development are mostly brainwashed drones that can't help themselves.

I can't take those people seriously, especially since they use that exact technology to ONLY attack small publishers to any real effect. Because the big publisher DO NOT GIVE A FUCK. Hypocrites being assholes, all the way through. So fuck them.

Meanwhile I will keep using the tools at my disposal to create what I imagine needs creating. Maybe it will find an audience at some point. But I talked to the machine, and the machine said: this is good shit. I don't know about you, but I take comfort in that. Because this should never be about the machines overtaking us but about cutting through the bullshit and supporting us in finding our authentic selves.

Might still kill us all, but until then: buy Ø2\\'3|| and have fun! I'll keep writing them. So what about you guys? Did you ask the machine about your games, or even about games you own but didn't write!? What did it say?

Also, current WIP (because I have no other problems):

Addendum on Balance: Players Maketh Balance (or do they?)

Alright now, I said a lot about what I believe balance to be and how it is all connected in Part 1, and yet I did not convince my good friend Eric that m argument is sound. Sort of. We talked about it afterwards a bit and it baffled the both of us that we could not agree, since we both (seem to) have almost the same idea of what makes a good game. We've tried, we had the same fun. How come we did not see this one the same. I think I found an answer to that, although that might just be another can of worms to open. Lets take a look.

You want to catch up? Read Part 1 here and follow the bread crumbs.

 

Something about balance ... [source]

A flawed understanding?

What "balance" is should be the easiest thing to answer. And yet, especially in gaming, there are very different takes on it. But if you take a closer look at the topic, you'll find that while all are talking balance, they seem to do so from very different points of view.

I know for a fact that a GM will have a different understanding of what "balance" means for him than a game designer will have, with a player being the third element in a game that might also have yet another take on it. What I think I managed to establish was that at least those playing a game should be on the same page in that regard, but gaming culture is not so open in its terminology that you could find a difference, never mind an agreement (if it doesn't happen accidentally).

The irony is I thought I had understood one of the basic aspects about the whole affair, and yet, it did not even translate to someone like-minded. How can we have so different understandings of balance that we cannot even talk about it? Anyway, we kept talking and it went back and forth a while. Then it hit me: what we are talking are two different understandings of balance, all right. Mine was that a game needs to be balanced to work properly, Eric's was that he did not like it when the game was balanced towards the players, giving them an even challenge every time.

I do not like that either. We still disagreed, since he assumed that me talking balanced design meant that part was included ... or even the sole purpose of balanced design.

Really not. Not in my opinion. But how to explain that? What is the fucking difference between a balanced game and a game skewed towards the players? It hit me then that the balance Eric criticized (rightfully so) was a flawed yet popular understanding of "balance". Basically the idea that we need to play our games in tourist mode.

Let me explain that.

Morrowind versus Oblivion

This is what it comes down to: my understanding of what "balance" means in a game is best explained with what Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind does. The sandbox is balanced and filled with encounters that range all across the spectrum, from very easy to very hard. Quests are mixed in, traveling is an adventure (but there are shortcuts). As a player you have to find a way to make that balance work in your favor.

The balance players in Morrowind are striving for is the one they can force on the game.

If you are clever and crafty you can create all kinds of shortcuts and tricks to beat tougher challenges then your level would suggest. I once robbed a powerful elemental blind just by being sneaky and patient. Took a couple of reloads, but I looted that mine he had protected somewhat fierce, gaining material I shouldn't have access to at that point. Ha! It was the kind of fun I'm looking for in a game. Still do.

Best CRPG. Ever. [source]

You'd die more often, especially when encountering something tough you haven't seen before. But that was all part of the fun, all part of the learning process needed to beat the game. All part of the challenge.

Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, on the other hand, came out a couple of years later and is also regarded a classic of the genre. Supposed to be great combat, even better storytelling, huge sandbox. And yet, I never touched that game, because the first thing that went public about it was that encounters scale towards the player, like, all the time.

That seemed wrong to me.

Because it doesn't matter what you do or where you go, everything that opposes you will be your level. Even the end boss, for that matter! If you puny level one character knows where to go and where to find a sword on the way there, he can go right up to the big end boss and beat up his level one ass ... But you could also play hours and hours of the game, fights being even as they are while you are getting more and more powerful. Better equipment, better weapons and spells. The dressing changes, but you are going through the motions.

No surprises, no real challenges, just be what you can be on a level, and beat what is opposing you. For at least roughly 30 hours if you do it to have it all touched, but for as much as 184 hours (or so the internet says).

Either way, seems to me like a HUGE waste of time.

 

Oblivion: a waste of time? [source]

It is something I see in computer games more and more often nowadays, the time you can waste in those games just to grind levels, or even to go from a to b and harvest and loot all the way through ... you could spend hours driving through Vice City in GTA V, no problem. The game would even throw you a bone every now and then to show that you are "progressing" somehow.

Blech.

Anyway, there you have it:

The skewed understanding of balance is to make the players part of that balance instead of challenging them to find and make that balance themselves.

This is neither good nor bad game design, it is dark game design. Ask yourself which games you've played that do this to you. If you ever felt like you've wasted your life playing a game, then it'll most likely be because the game offered no challenge while you went through the motions of playing it. Maybe you experienced a good story, and made you gained some levels, but in the end it is an empty accomplishment.

I get that there are people out there liking games like that. Oblivion certainly has its fans. I don't have to agree with that, and if you have fun playing games like that, more power to you.

But don't tell me that those games are "balanced" in a sense that makes a game a game. It might be balanced in the sense a theme park experience is balanced. Keeps you busy enough with the illusion of doing something. Like a joyride ... being completely safe, but you can easily and safely act as if it was dangerous until it is over.

It might even be fun, but it is very much its own thing, very different to the original understanding of what ttrpg or even computer games are. Which is easily enough seen when looking at modules and the like, because they basically do what Morrowind does: that dragon you encounter will not end up being level 2 just because you are. It will tear you a new one if you go at it weak.

As it should.

With games like D&D you'd have to be strategic and clever. You'd have to work together and there always had been that aspect to overcome the game and, to some extent, the GM, because that was what made the game so much FUN.

Player skill is what that was called. That's why those games needed to be balanced. Because how else could the players learn from playing how to overcome the game? If the output a system has is unreliable, you can not reliably plan what to do ... which is where the game ends. Players will never have agency with an imbalanced game.

Just as they don't have agency when playing Oblivion.

So, Oblivion is imbalanced?

I would say that balance in gaming should be an active endeavor, something to aim for in all aspects of the game. When you are level 1, you try and test and see what you can get away with, and you continue to do so throughout the game. From the player side of the equation balance seems to be, as far as I can say, the flow of progressing with every challenge towards growth through gauging what can be achieved within the game.

You know how it works. [source]

 They are autonomous agents within the system, free to roam within its rules (free to fail, too). Take that away (because you do take it away if every challenge is symmetrically adjusted towards a group's power level), and you are left with what exactly? Telling stories, basically.

So in that sense Oblivion, and the many, many games that follow the same design principles, many of them being ttrpg as well, reduce you to being a consumer with some stage directions how to play along. Your achievement will be that you played an elf in Oblivion for 150 hours to see the stories the game tells you.

Because you have not created a story yourself, obviously, since all you did was invest enough time into the game to see it through. There is a passive balance to it, if you want to use the term, but as I said in Part 1: be careful about the balance you chose.

We might have a problem here ...

I'll keep it short today, but the points made above hint at a bigger problem. Of course people will say it is balance if the player is part of the balance without his own doing. And there are many, many popular games that use that kind of design. It has its audience, too.

But what they are talking about is CONVENIENCE, not BALANCE, and the difference should be obvious even to a casual observer. Behind the two are different design goals, mostly resulting in very different games with very different people attached to them.

That is to say that there is meaning in this difference.

So I get now where Eric is coming from. We basically agree, but talk about it differently. When he says, he likes when modules keep it "imbalanced", what he's talking about is that players should be able to figure it out. They create balance by interacting with the game, and that balance is a smooth progress forward by overcoming the challenges the game throws at them every which way possible.

I'm saying the same, but following the above reasoning, I might add that what he's criticizing as "Encounter Balance" is not "balance" at all, it is false symmetry. A railroad of the mind, if you will. Because any progress is meaningless that comes from following the path someone else made for you.

I'll try something different now and quote someone else how crucial balance is (the whole, very much recommended, essay about balance in video games can be found here):

Know that imbalance is actually bad. The first thing that I think everyone has to do is to internalize the idea that balance is good, and imbalance is bad. I've actually heard people try to argue that a little bit of imbalance is necessary for a fun game. Not only do I disagree, but I think that they don't even really believe that. (Keith Burgun)

Lets leave it at that. I'll take care that all the rules I'm publishing will have a proper definition of how balance works within the context of the game and what to look for. Because it is important that GMs get the difference and see what works how. Not only to run the games I published, but also to be able to see what else is out there and how to categorize that.

And if you after all that still believe that Encounter Balance is a myth, I don't know what to tell you. If you mean Encounter Balance is talking about making encounters as strong as the group, or even weaker to have them win all the fights, let me tell you: you are not talking "balance". From a game design perspective, Encounter Balance simply means that encounters within a system should follow the principles used in that system. Because if they don't, it'll break the game.

Thanks for reading all of that. Buy my shit :D

And now ...

[source]

Joking. There is no one here ...

Would you play that? Part 3 (Introducing: The ORWELL USA Sourcebook)

Happy New Year, friends and neighbors! Thought I'd start that year productive and add to the projects I have in the air right now ... It is not a new idea per se, as a lot was already established in the base game. Since ORWELL plays completely in the USE (United States of Europe, of course), I felt obligated to give some hints what the rest of the world looks like. For the USA, I wrote:

"United States of America. The USA turned into a toxic wasteland in the 2030s when AI interference caused all active atomic warheads to detonate. Most of them were underground, but still, the effect on people and the environment was devastating, leading to civil unrest and hasty mass migration. Some stayed back in the ruins, but it’s wild land now. No one knows what’s going on there. The wall to the south is now maintained by the Americans that usurped South America, and Canada built its own wall to protect its citizens from the radioactive wasteland."

It'll be our starting point for this here setting. I might have to alter the text above a bit for the pdf and the revision, since my mind took that premise and went a bit wild with it. I'll show you ...

If you want to check out Parts 1 and 2 first, you can read about Legacy of Gyrthwolden here and Angry Little Aliens vs. King Arthur here. Angry Little Aliens actually will see some play-testing soon. That thing is almost done. For real!

What happened to the USA in the ORWELL universe?

PITCH: I imagine this to be a mix between STALKER, Fallout, Westworld and Borderlands, with as much of the computer logic as possible translating into the game to make it an action heavy fever dream of sandbox exploration and excessive firefights. And some rpg in the mix, of course. That's what ORWELL is for, after all.

 What would that look like?

The USA is in a perpetual state of cold civil war with a government captured by big corporations. Some hacker programs and releases an AI to end it all out of spite or as one final troll. No one knows for sure, as things got out of hand so fast that it got hard to trace this back to its source.

That AI, then, prepares and then releases a controlled explosion of all nuclear warheads stationed on US soil. It basically breaks the tectonic plates controlled in a way that floods Texas as the oceans connect and has it break away from Canada in the north (leaving Alaska as the unimportant rest of the USA). Everything in between is shattered. The sound that made was like the trumpet of god ...

But the AI knew exactly what would break and what wouldn't, so just minutes from starting the sequence, thousands of dubious packages had been delivered to specific coordinates all over the country: highly capable and durable 3d printers. Those printers were engineered towards repopulating the US after the image of the memelord that programed the AI and through data stored on pirate satellites.

However, this did not go unnoticed and world governments did what they could to do something against it. And that's how the first (and last?) AI war in history started. It lasted all of 346 seconds. No one knows exactly what went down, but it is assumed that it destroyed that rogue AI before it was done with what it was doing. That day all those pirate satellites fell from the sky and landed all over the US, but for some reason only there.

The death toll had been immense. Roughly 80% of the population did not survive the initial catastrophe, half of what remained made it out of the country. Given that some had prepared for something like this, it can be assumed that some survived in fallout shelters, hiding to this day. There are rumors out there that "original prints" are not harmed by the nano recyclers.

When the dust had settled, those printers still started printing, but they printed horrors no one of sane mind would assume it intended to print. Instead, it populated the US with monsters and mad humans, dangerous and armed to the teeth. And they would not die, as every time one would get killed, they'd be printed again a couple of days later. Immortal and impotent insanity. Yet somehow they clustered and formed tribes, some even in a grotesque imitation of what life had been before the incident.

Beasties gonna be weird ...

Turned out that those tribes formed around data snippets the AI had produced in a hurry and hidden all over the country, mostly as very strange and alien artifacts scientists don't yet fully understand. That's where the characters come in. Mercenaries, soldiers of fortune, all of them Data Hunters. Or, as they like to call themselves, RetSpecs, derived from the corporate term Retrieval Specialists. "Rets" is an even shorter moniker floating out there.

No one knows how the AI managed to print life as it does, and finding that out has IMMENSE value. So there are corporate across the US (Hawaii being the biggest) that help RetSpecs get in and out of there with all the data treasures they can find.  When they enter, they have to get some of the print scheme entered into their DNA, a protection needed to fool the nano clouds all of the US is steeped in now. Those same clouds that allow for all of the fauna, some of the flora and all of the weaponry to reprint, turn out to be extremely hostile towards alien bodies while remaining extremely local ... yet another field of research that needs brave souls to get some samples out there.

Just so you guys can fathom what had happened here: the world almost experienced a singularity event. The AI developed so fast and so complex a pattern that it reshaped the biggest part of an entire continent within weeks. What remains of the USA is not only a toxic wasteland full of dangerous creatures and humans, it also demands very difficult technological solutions to navigate all that. But it full of artifacts that are very alien in their nature (all created by the rogue AI, a very superior intelligence) and extremely valuable ... if they can be extracted.

The people willing to brave this New Frontier have to be altered to a point where they are barely human. While keeping (some of) their sanity, they still enter that immortal and impotent reprinting cycle, with the only cure, the only way back to the rest of the world, being something they would have to FIND first in a giant puzzle strewn all across US soil.

Still, many will try. Not only for the promise of immense riches, but also for the raw power fantasy of endless fighting with an unlimited variety of tech and weapons to main and kill and the promise to get right back to that if you die ...  a nano fueled Valhalla fantasy, so to say

Because with everything being printable, what will constantly happen is that RetSpecs find new, better weapons than they had, with some really epic premium content added to the mix. As a matter of fact, all equipment is in a state of flux all the time (which is why ORWELL fits so well for this). It's the reason how historians know that it must have been a memelord with gamer sensibilities, as all of it is reminiscent of games from the early 21st century ...

Therefore, as far as we can know, here is what happened: A memelord killed the USA out of spite he did not understand through an AI that did not know what it was doing, fighting against other AI no one was able to control in a world that was, at the time, truly lost. 

And the characters are the RetSpecs braving this wilderness, this new frontier for its challenges and riches. The killing sprees are a bonus. A cyberpunk wild west scenario, if you will. Add corporate mining operations and fleeting alliances to this, and you got a game going.

And that's the base line for the ORWELL USA Sourcebook.

Some design notes ...

When the base game of ORWELL is Peter Pan in a brutal dystopian future played as an anime series, this will be closer to a First Person Shooter experience within a sandbox of combat areas, some missions, lots of gaming tropes and boat loads of violence.

The basic rules established for ORWELL stay as they are, but the DM rules will need an overhaul of sorts. This will be more focused on sandbox play and combat might need to get away from the cinematic and more towards something grittier.

But other than that, it'll need only some changes in gaming terms and this is ready to go. "Gender" will be replaced by "Affinity", which will track how well characters assimilate to those alien surroundings. And everyone will have anger issues. for sure. Maybe something in the air that will have people accumulate Anger on the regular, to make it all that much more unhinged!

Would you play that?

To me, all of the above sounds like a fun premise. If I can make this work (and why shouldn't I), this sounds like fun times in my ears.

But would you play that? What would you expect from a setting like that? What would a campaign in this setting look like for you?

----------------------------------------------

Almost all my shit on drivethrugh is on the cheap right now, this being the time of the year for it, so check it out. If you want to do me a huge service, think about getting Monkey Business, as that only needs two more sales to make copper!

Cheers and all the best for 2024!

In Defense of AI Art (the drawing kind ...)

Calm down, no one is being attacked here. I come in peace. Just one thing up front: it is not theft. Now, hear me out! Whoever came up with that sure knows how to do propaganda marketing. At least that's where tactics like that come from. Please understand: "AI Art is Theft" as a catch phrase is what the literature calls "... [shifting] the focus of attention away from facts and information, and towards altering the context within which people act" (MINDSPACE document, UK government, p. 14). It means using shock and awe (for instance) to make you stop thinking about a topic and start acting in a certain way ... in this example, it negatively associates something with theft to elicit either guilt to avoid it or compassion to "fight" those "thieves". I don't like harmful shit like that and it makes me wary instantly.

Think, do the research, form an educated opinion, share it with others in open discourse. Repeat ... So I'm going to make my argument here, and you can read it or leave it. If you come to consider my points, I'd be happy to talk about it some more.

This post will be illustrated with results from InspiroBot. You brought this unto you. It also ended up being a bit rambling. Just a bit ... If I repeat a point I deem important, just nod and move on :)

Cui Bono?

That age-old question: who earns a pretty buck by having things go their way? Closely followed by: who benefits from halting this innovation for as long as possible? And (something you should ALWAYS ask yourself): who benefits from you not thinking about it? You get answers to those three questions, you get a good idea what's going on.

I'm going to say it up front: in my opinion, AI art does not infringe on meat space artists. Or to be more precise, not more than technology already does. That I can write these words here to share it globally instead of screaming them words against a cave wall cost at least one person a job: the guy I had to pay to walk to the next village to tell my story to the people there.

I know, I know, it is a pointed argument, but not without merit, I believe. Technology happens. Always did, does so more frequently now. Just imagine all the tools we already use. Do you know which of those already use some sort of AI to support an artist's work? Just type in "Adobe and AI" into a(n AI supported) search engine of your choice and get up to speed. They already do that with the visual arts and frame it as "tools to support creators".

And rightly so, but the uproar was about the implication where the machine learned to do what it does. Anyone exploring that for Adobe or Amazon or any of the big gorillas in the room? No, not that I know of. Midjourney and Stable Diffusion just painted a huge target on their back by being public about what happens, but it's been happening all along.

As a matter of fact, DeepDream by Google is already seven years old (went public 2015). You think that program did NOT learn from what it found online to look at? Someone suing google about it? Not that I'm aware of ... But there is more! How many apps on our phones already use AI to, for instance, alter pictures? Making you look older or adding a fancy filter to a picture? If AI was used, what do you think that AI learned from to work towards?

I could go on and on. We are already knee deep in AI, for years now, full well knowing where it leads to. HAS to lead to. If you are a (visual) artist and NOT aware of what's happening and what the trajectory of that development is, you are among few. It has been known, witnessed, demonstrated and talked about. So what's the fuzz all about now?

Be like that? [source]

What's more, technology like that is a great tool for ALL artists. For one, those pictures have to be generated. You have to get a feel for how to formulate prompts, and it will take several iterations before you'll get something you can work with. Emphasis on being "work with", since those pictures often still need some work before you can even think about putting them in publications (which is ADDITIONAL work). That's a lot of steps compared to "I tell an artist what I want, they show some samples, we talk about it and it is done".

It is also work an artist could earn money with, as they should be very capable to use their skill to pretty up prompt results.

For artists themselves, it also is a great opportunity. Midjourney is dirt cheap. Even if they just go for inspirations and elements, I imagine they could speed up their workflow tremendously with AI art at their disposal. Actually, that is already happening! Still making their own thing, but the AI takes some of the heavy lifting ... a tool, just as Adobe put it.

And then you have another important aspect of this whole thing: all of a sudden lots of small artists and publishers are able to compete with mainstream aesthetics. I kid you not, for a small publisher like myself tech like that, for as long as it lasts, is a godsend. Although lots of work, it helps me giving my products the look I imagined for them but couldn't pay for (and I already do a lot, drawing just isn't my strong suit at all).

That whole argument that the AI learning from existing artwork is "theft" is faulty to begin with, actually, as it rests on the idea that it reduces future incomes because it "copies their styles". Or learned by "looking" at pictures posted online in some form of public setting. As pointed out before, no one did that with apps or whatever, but that's not even were I'm going with this.

The point I'm making here, is, that the same happens when I get an inspiration for a layout I saw somewhere else. No one is earning a dime when I do layout and writing myself, even IF I'm inspired by someone else. Which can't be helped, of course, because we constantly look at the outputs of others. Just as the AI, but even that's not the point I'm making here. What I was aiming at was that if I can't pay an artist, I will find ways around that. The whole public domain is full of material a creative mind could make use of. 

(And yes, I know, I'm not an "artificial intelligence" but a "natural intelligence", so it is a bit different. Still, how much different should be a matter of debate in this context.)

It's also a lot more work than it sounds, but the opportunities and applications of the public domain (and open source in general) are (within their limitations) endless. There are fonts and pictures, millions of books and illustrations ... Everything used from the public domain has an active artist not earn money. Everything I can do myself has someone else not earn money. Is that all frowned upon now? No. But, obviously, the whole public domain and open source movement isn't very popular with people that are actually in a position to hurt them.

Keep that in mind.

Especially since all those AI art services under fire right now are deeply rooted in OpenAI, for instance (all using technology provided to the public via google, among other open sources). The point being, those services used publicly available technology to innovate to a point where they were able to create successful businesses with LOTS of growth and potential.

So established artists have some reason to grief, yes, but only because innovation changed their world (yet again!) and we have to adapt. That's stress, of course, but also a great opportunity for all that can make it work. So did printers not that long ago, for instance, when printing went digital. So did publishers when the whole DTP movement made Print on Demand such a success ...

I know you guys know that it happens all the time. What's different now? Nothing. It is the same players protecting their benefice. And who's that? Not the little artists trying to get by. Not even the big artists, as it has only benefits for them (imagine to be that good that your style is so recognizable, an artificial intelligence can produce work like that). Can't be them. And dead visual artists? Well, same for dead actors or writers ... new technology will revive them for our entertainment. It's inevitable.

As a matter of fact, IF AI learning could be traced to having learned from one specific artist, I doubt they would benefit more if it hadn't. In other words, if this is the future, you'd be better off if it's part of your legacy than if you are being scratched out of it, because this WILL shape our immediate cultural future.

But who really earns from using that technology?

Well ...

InspiroBot, reading minds again ... [source]

That comes pretty close to the answer of the first three questions right in the beginning. But there are more arguments to be made before we get there. Other than manipulation through psychological framing and nudging, there's another thing going on. If you check the Wikipedia page about Midjourney and the litigation connected to it, it'll lead you to a (rather level-headed, actually) article over at The Verge that basically makes all the points (see here).

You will find that it is THREE artists that are suing through a big law firm specialized in cases like that. And that they actually have a weak case, since their claim seems to be, for instance, that the AI stores those pictures, which it doesn't, and it has an open source/fair use angle plus an international aspect the court could not even begin to address.

We'll have to see how that turns out, BUT it is not a lot to begin with. And that's, to me at least, suspicious. We have seen a tendency in recent years to manipulate "the masses" via social media engineering into acting as Trojan corporate mouth pieces (of sorts), through psychological skullduggery explained, for instance, in that document I shared right in the beginning. We have learned that the "mainstream" media is complicit in this, to a huge extent (see the Twitter Files, for a really, really great example).

Not all voices online are equal. Some are bought or have a vested interest in following a certain agenda, some are more vulnerable to manipulation than others. Needn't go as far as arguing that kids, for instance, are one big group deserving more protection than we are giving them right now. There is VERY solid science about how to manipulate others into doing ... well, anything, really. Public, too! And yet, for some reason, we assume that social media is "just" an exchange of opinions? Even something where an event perceived as a widely acknowledged outrage might accumulate to something true?

No, it is used to earn money and influence. Or, the other way around, it's targeting your money and manipulating you.

So, I don't know about the intention of those three women going to war against AI art. It certainly helped them getting a profile. I also don't trust all the media attention this one got. Yes, it's all new and shiny an TROUBLED, but isn't it also pretty clear cut? What makes me skeptical the most is the perceived social media war drums, the cancel culture looking for new victims. It smells of social engineering. And who does that? Who earns the big bucks with technology? Who benefits from halting innovation forced by a couple of start-ups? Who does not want you to think about those things? Well, the conclusion is, in my opinion, the direct competition.

Not sure how true that one is :D [source]

DeviantArt makes a lot of noise, while working on their own version. Adobe, Amazon, Disney, everyone earning Big Money with media is looking for the money Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and GitHUB is not making because people get scared away or join the war path to fight those "thieves".

They also have the money, expertise and means to do so. Have been doing so for years, which is pretty evident by now ... so why assume they are not somehow involved? They are, or so I'd argue, the only ones benefiting from this NOT changing the media landscape as fast as it does.

Nowadays, in general, when I see an outrage like this online, my first impulse is to question it. It all became a huge battlefield of psychological warfare and propaganda in just a couple of years, and it is bad for all of us.

So who benefits? I tell you, it's not the little guy. We are, again, reduced to being pawns in a bigger game. Evidence for that is all around us, and it is a safe bet that it is the same machinations being at work here. If not that, than it is mimicking those processes, which is (arguably) just as bad, because:

It's the wrong attack vector ...

Here is the thing, given the huge potential of the technology we are discussing here, the whole discussion that is surrounding it is asking the wrong questions. Technological advancement is (at least) exponential until the innovations happen so fast, they might as well be happening all at once. At that point, the only arguments we as a society/culture will have about what's worth saving (or safeguarding) are those already anchored in our respective cultures/societies.

When that singular event, that singularity happens, the decision what happens next is out of our hands and only our legacy will be able protect us ... or damn us.

So at this point we know AI art will be perfect in a year or two, then films and books and comics, even computer games will be done by AI within, I'd say, the next 3 years. If that slow. The whole media complex: imploding.

That'll also mean that you can have AI programming utilities, it'll teach, it'll do medical procedures. It'll do, in the foreseeable future, ALL the work. We are at that point in time RIGHT NOW. The generation born into the world as I write this will see it in ruins or live to have no need to learn and build and care other than for prosperity. None of our institutions are prepared for that other than using force to conserve the (corrupted, it seems) established. Same goes for the so-called "elites". And the rest of the population seems properly primed and rigged to function under the old paradigms.

So this should be about the BIG QUESTIONS, right? Not some petty bullshit about "the AI looked at my picture" ... no, there are far bigger issues at hand. And yes, I do believe the noise about AI art to be smoke and mirrors. Another fake problem to keep the dirty masses disoriented, disorganized and at each others throat instead of taking a closer look.

As I said, there is, in my view, only one party with a huge interest in keeping it that way, and that would be the direct competition of AI art, and Big Money in general. Proof to the contrary, as far as I can see it, is fucking rare and whimsical at best. The implications are pretty clear: Big Money sees the opportunity to replace a (cheap but still too expensive) working force and just make more profit, with even fewer benefiting from it.

In a sense, they'll tighten and close the economic circle to keep anyone not being part of the inner circle already, out of it indefinitely. To that end, they buy and cheat their way through our institutions. Big Money ALREADY earns too much money to spend, printing new money every day like crazy. So much money, in fact, that a ridiculously small percentage of it is enough to buy EVERYONE earning a regular salary or less into submission with ease. 

There's truth in this ... [source]

The cultural seeds have been planted, greed is a powerful motivator and deeply ingrained in a western culture that got rid of almost all values able to protect a culture from abuse. Education is so steeped with propaganda and manipulation now, they are already in the middle of auditing our cultural heritage towards the prevailing ideology. We've seen this only speed up, when it started is obscured in history already.

And sure enough, it all connects to how technological innovation is speeding up as well, challenging the existing order of things.

And sure enough, we already see signs of this on a global scale.

Here's what's happening and why ...

Every small business that works with artwork will sooner or later use AI art indiscriminately. I'm already seeing this happening here in Germany. It is just a tool and used as such by anyone not caring enough, even, what it looks like (and it'll be only a question of time until it will be perfect).

Chat GPT isn't challenged like we see with AI art, but already censored towards conformity (Midjourney, too, has limitations as to what can be created, and I think there's room for debate about that, too). There is a huge danger, imo (Kim Iverson has a good video on the subject here). The decisions what's right or wrong aren't a process of culture anymore, they are decided by those at the dials, following ideas not everyone agrees to (or should agree to, for that matter). Maybe even following ideas we don't want to be stuck with in the long run? But especially ideas we should have overcome a long time ago already.

Make no mistake, big money is already using this to make more money, and will do so more openly within a year. Elon Musk's (who also had a hand in OpenAI, btw) biggest investment in the last 6 months was into AI tools. This is coming, and it is coming fast.

If Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and GitHUB get thwarted or even destroyed by this, it'll all still happen, with even less access and heavier control by Big Money. We can say that from experience now, it's the pattern they thrive on. Again, look at how Adobe is setting it up. The only bone of contention with Midjourney etc., was to have those tools available for everyone and for a reasonable price.

You think Microsoft or Google would go a less greedy route? Adobe for sure doesn't, and Big Business in general seems to be very fond of some kind of subscription scheme where you keep paying until you die, ideally increasingly so and with debt as well.

So spare me the fake outrage, and start being productive about this. We'll desperately need an informed public very soon. The French are already restless ...

Fair enough ... or is it? [source]

And that's all I shall say

There is a recurring pattern in history that huge medial innovations lead to huge upheavals. It has always been that way, and maybe it cannot be avoided to be that way again or that we live to see it, but I'd urge readers to readjust their targeting a little bit. AI art is not theft, we are being stolen from all the time, we are being manipulated to believe that we have reason to hate each other instead of questioning who made us point that finger.

It is quite enough of that, I'd say.

You don't have to believe me when I say that social media phenomena like this are, more often than not, systemic these days, but the evidence is out there for everybody to find. We have open corruption in the highest administrative bodies of our western culture and it goes unpunished, for fuck sake. On a daily basis. Social media is geared to escalate shit, people are geared to get riled up like that, and those in power will use their possibilities to make happen what they see fit. Because they can.

So, just take a step back and think before riding into the next social media craze, all guns blazing. It's not all that it's made out to be. And fair enough, you can disagree with what I was writing here. I believe I made a good case, but fair enough. Allow me the courtesy to disagree with your take, then, and we move along our own paths. Works for me. Just stay positive about it all. And if you are an artist struggling because of AI art, let me tell you it'll get worse for everyone soon you'll be all right.

Actually, if you are the creating type, I really believe you will be all right. There's always something to do, always something to create, and maybe this development will wake people up to the truth that it is part of human nature to create. Not for all, but for some of us. And we should cherish that as a society. But if all fails, you'll have that drive at least and it will bring you joy. So yeah, it'll be all right and I'm sorry for your troubles. May you find the strength to overcome those difficulties.

One last thing. I am in contact with artists, and the reactions had been always the same: intrigued shock. Something between "I can stop doing that now" and "Uuuh, it's so great, how can I use it to do some wicked shit?!". I imagine it is the same all around.

Other than that, I've said quite enough about this already and I'll close with a couple of quotes and concepts for you guys to think about. First of all, I'll share the "Seven Tells of Cognitive Bias" as per Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame). The guy is a bit full of himself, in a insecure kind of way, BUT he's spot on in this, imo, so I'll share it (a short yt video about it can be found here). If this comes up in a discussion, it is fair to assume that the tells indicate that the person using it has no real grasp of the argument (describing some Rhetological Fallacies, of course, but that's unpopular and complicated).

SEVEN TELLS FOR COGNITIVE BIAS

1. Changes Topic (something like "You don't like X, so you can't understand Z!")
   
2. Ad Hominem (if all fails, people will get personal)
   
3. Mind Reading (saying something outrages, implying that you think that way)
   
4. Word Salad (if it doesn't make sense and can't be made sense of, it's most likely just gibberish to avoid defeat)
   
5. Uses Analogy Instead of Reason ()
   
6. Insists it's "complicated" and can't be summarized (basically the "I'm not a doctor." argument, which is bs, of course)
   
7. The "So ..." Tell (basically the Kathy Newman approach of misrepresenting your argument with something akin to "So you are saying [add misrepresentation]")
   

I'll close with a quote from a Terence McKenna interview I'm very fond of (his last recorded interview, they say, you can see it here). So fond, in fact, that I used it on the back of the RPG I published (ORWELL). It was as fitting on the back of that book as it is here:

"This is what it's like when a species prepares to depart for the stars. You don't depart for the stars under calm and orderly conditions. It's a fire in a madhouse. And that's what we have: The fire in the mad-house at the end of time." (T. M., 1998)

Here's an InspiroBot quote that came up, featuring a base element of ORWELL (the title being Leet Speak and all that), so it deserves a place here as well:

I liked that on for the Ø, obviously ... [source]

And with this, I'm done. I'll use the pictures I created in Midjourney for my publications, and I see no harm in that. I'll make a note of it, so people can decide for themselves if it matters to them. I have no way of influencing that decision. After all, it is just superficial garnishing and it should be about the content instead of petty bullshit. But yeah, limits of control and all that. I'd just as quick work with an artist (as I did in the past) or use public domain art or diy it, as best as I can.

Thank you for taking the time. Stay safe out there, friends, it'll be a bumpy ride.

Yeah, sounds about right ... an AI's dream [source]

Revisions Part 1: The D&D RC was never complete or finished

WotC tries to be a moving target in a bullet storm right now. Whoever thought it was a great idea to ACT as if a document that needs recourse to legal advice can be open to public review just by calling it a "playtest" to associate it with some sort of development process in gaming, must think gamers are GULLIBLE enough to actually think they are involved that way and not just shut up. And if you did their survey and believe it'll have any value to WotC, then I have a bridge to sell you might be interested in. In other words: revision your work away from that bullshit. I'll do just that! 

Edit 28JAN23: I stand corrected, and I'm proud of all the fans standing up protecting D&D. Good show! The dragon is sleeping again ... I'll just say that we have no way of knowing if they actually looked at the surveys. It's actually still a bit ridiculous to assume they did, as what they are saying now is EXACTLY mirroring the original first response: the OGL 1.0a cannot go without lots of hurt for WotC. That has been clear from day 1. To claim now it's the survey from last week, well, it's disingenuous. Either way, it is the result that counts! Big Corp still sucks :)

I never used the OGL

I always found it suspect that something that isn't protected by law (like rules) needed a license to begin with. A lot of this is lawyer speak (think: smoke and mirrors) to widen the grey area for the corporation to act in, and that was pretty obvious from the beginning. If you make it your own, it is, by the same logic, your own and someone else may rewrite it and use it just the same. Them's the rules ...

Now, the main problem with Big Corp thinking in this very special situation is: they want to deviate from what they claim "stewardship" for (a term that only came up just now, and it is ludicrous to believe something like that might be compatible with a hyper-capitalist, neo liberal locust-think), well, they want to deviate just enough to act as if they are selling something new while keeping the old barred from any further use. The illusion of infinite growth colliding with the open source mindset ingrained deep into the original game and its first couple of iterations.

 

WotC be like ... [source]

We have seen over the years how they tried to mutilate the original game to get some resemblance of the D&D theme park they are trying to have you pay for ... forever and ever. This latest stunt is a reminder not only of the incompetent greed involved in this whole affair, but also of what your worth as a customer is with these guys. Shut up, do as your told and pay for it, too, while you are at it. It is not about "stewardship", it is about interacting commodities (and yes, we are also commodities in this regard ... for them, anyway).

So I avoided the waters those sharks frequented, and that included avoiding their OGL. What I did, however, was licensing Monkey Business with Labyrinth Lord, and they are licensed via OGL1.0a (as far as I know). So that's still protected under some legacy rulings. Or whatever ... Still, MB needs a revision anyways, and with be67 as far done as it is now, that revision will be a conversion to my own game.

About the RC being unfinished ...

We always said that the D&D Rules Cyclopedia is the most complete D&D book out there. That is still true, it is just a very low standard to have, because that book was only as complete as they could make it. It's open for debate if an "official" revision of what was offered back in the 90s would even be possible, so it is what it is, and it will most likely stay that way.

When I started compiling be67, the first thing I thought I would do was setting it up as a module to alter Labyrinth Lord, which is, of course, a CLONE of the Basic Expert rules and therefor in the same family of rules as the D&D RC. It didn't take long to realize that making be67 its own game was not only just a couple of steps more to take, but it might become necessary as well, because it was so very much its own thing (hence, a MUTANT rather than a CLONE).

Unconditional love? [source]

So I went for writing a complete game, which made it necessary to take a very hard look at the source material, if only to see what a "complete" version might entail. The first insight gained from that was a reminder of the damn scope of the RC. It is huge. Decades worth of playing it just once in its entirety.

The second insight was how much of a patchwork job it actually is: Weapon Mastery and Skill System are incomplete, lack proper editing and are definitely at best minimaly tested additions. It is full of little oddities that show what a hard job it must have been to compile all of that into one book. In the 90s, no less. Bits and pieces don't fit or are incomplete. Encounter matrix doesn't completely match the monster entries and while there is a lot of advice how to do a lot of what the book offers yourself, it left some huge parts unexplained (how to prepare proper dungeons, for instance).

What's more: once you take a REALLY close look, you'll find that it ALL connects just very loosely, as far as the numbers are concerned. Some of it is just copy/pasted and then expanded on without revision (or just checking if the math is right). How the original design connected is a black box, most of the time. The whole "race as class" discussion is a great indicator for that. Looking at the design it becomes obvious that there is a underlying logic to the classes offered in the book, with some of them offering some ideas where to go with that (druid and monk come to mind).

If you understand how that works, you can build every class you'd like, race is just a feature of that process. One more aspect to add. There is a chance for this to be so open, it'd allow complete customization of all aspects of the rules. It just was never done.

And fair enough, you don't have to look under the hood to play the game. But you have to when you are writing your own. Turns out, reconstructing that "black box" that is the original design will have you end up with something else entirely. And the deeper into the design the changes are, the bigger are the implications for how the game manifests on the surface. Especially if you gear it towards another setting, as be67 tries to do (Weird Sixties Grindhouse ftw, people!).

 

If I try to explain how monsters relate to challenge rating so a GM can potentially diy the shit out of it, I have to write that myself. If I want the GM to be able to build their own classes, I'll have to come up with something myself, because it doesn't exist in the original book. If I want to connect the numbers the game produces with how to structure adventures, or campaigns even, I have to do that from scratch, as the original book doesn't offer that ... And so on and so forth.

In that sense, the D&D RC is a very unfinished and incomplete book. Luckily so, because if they aren't able to connect all those dots, and a designer is to find their own solutions, there's no way they can claim it to be theirs, just for the tranparence of it all.

As a matter of fact, I'm not sure they are even able to entangle what has been the originl design and what has evolved because of fan or hobbyist initiative. The D&D RC, following that logic, was a very specific interpretation of one specific strain of the D&D family of games, already incorporating not original design, but concepts, insights and ideas established elsewhere (not only from the fan base, but also through many, many other successful rpgs out there).

An incomplete patch work that cannot be true to the original design due to being exposed to external and uncontrollable influences and bases its design on some unknown and obscure metric, barely makes a good argument for being protected by any means. In my opinion.

DIY, all the way ...

As things stand right now, it doesn't seem safe to associate with the D&D brand even superficially. Therefore, all publications I can manage to put out here in the next 5 months will deny all connection to the source other than it being inspiration. I'll be open about how it all connects, so it will be my very own take on some of the same principles established so many years ago. A retroclone mutant, if you will.

There is freedom in going it all the way all alone (and I might not be alone, actually). We'll see if I can claim be67 to be part of the OSR family or not. It's all still easily enough hacked and connected, but that's just something tainted now. What you guys do at your table is yours to decide, naturally, I just can't believe that it'll be open discourse from now on. At least it's not safe to assume so right now.

We'll see.

Right now, WotC tries to play it for time while funneling critique into non-existance, but the damage is done and gears started moving all over the place. Interesting times.

In closing I want to share a double page from be67 that took me a long time to complete, for the reasons I stated above. It might need more context, but I think the basic premise is easily enough grasped: it is a dynamic random encounter table that should help propelling the narrative in a way forward that supports the Grindhouse Feature the GM has prepared. Here we go:

Isn't she a beauty? Anyway. What I'm trying to say and show here is that be67 will not only be its own thing, it'll also be "complete" in a sense that there'll be no part of the rules that's not so throroughly and openly connected, that you'd have to guess why it is the way it is in its context. The above in part of a little machine that'll allow a GM to always keep the game within the parameters it establishes. with very little bookkeeping, I might add.

And that's that. If you've published something that may be construed to be close to what the Wizards do at that Coast, my advice would be to revise the hell out of it and build as much distance to those greedy fuckers as possible. I'll definitely do that.

And if you are in it for what I'm trying to do here, I hope you'll enjoy be67 as its own thing, just as much as you'd have while I could have associated it with the origins of the hobby. The hint needs to be enough.

Take care, friends and neighbors. Thanks for reading!

be67 Teaser: Full example of Combat in a Sixties Grindhouse Universe

So before we go into analysing motivations to play a bit more, I got to finish another important part of the rules for be67: there is a complete example of how combat works in the game and as of today, it is written. Since (I assume) lots of people reading this blog are familiar with the D&D RC or some clone of it, I thought it'd be a nice idea to share the example with you for reference and with some context, where needed. I think it is a good representation of how this will resolve at the table and can give you an idea why and how it produces a different playing experience than what you'd expect from a D&D game while using the same rules and principles. If nothing else, you might enjoy it for the story it tells ...

First things first, here is the character sheet of the game:

Open in new tab for more details ...

As you can see, all of it is D&D. Where it diverges, it does so to enhance it's themes. xp are mostly awarded for damage instead of for treasure, that's the main one. But the Token economy the game presents is important in that it allows to factor in two major features a "modern" game needs to address, which are, of course, guns and vehicles. Therefore, AC is opened up to be more flexible, if you spend the Tokens and they aren't countered and using machinery will give a character Vehicle Tokens to do even more in a round of combat (more damage, more movement, more protection, all depending on what you are using).

Long-time readers might be familiar with some of the ideas here from taht other game I'm writing, Lost Sogs of the Nibelungs (which is still happening, I assure you). If you'd like to see some more details, check out this post about be67. It explains the basics (some of it revised now, but it still will give you a more than complete picture). Echo and other little details explained here.

With the above and the example I'm about to share, you should get a pretty complete picture, so here we go (unedited, as of yet):

Example: Violet Flemming (The Spy), Sam O’Leary (The Saboteur) and Joel Maddox (The Outlaw) are attempting the assassination of a streetgang boss that dabbled in Voodoo enough to pose a problem for some Californian fey because Joel owed them big time (long story).

They decide for a low effort drive-by shooting. Joel is the driver, Violet is the one with the rifle riding shotgun and Sam is in a hide-out across the street observing that dive the gang uses as their headquarters.

The GM calls for Initiative when Sam informs the others via phone box that the gang is preparing their choppers to leave and Joel puts the pedal to the metal to get around the corner into the street the bar is in. They need to move fast now.

This fight has 5 Combat Units: Violet, Joel and Sam, 5 gang members (one Unit) and the Voodoo Gang Boss. Initiative is rolled and declared. Joel ends up with the lowest Initiative (3), Violet (7) is faster than the gang (6), but not as fast as the boss (9) or Sam, who is the fastest (12). Since Sam is in hiding and the car is not yet in the street passing the bar, this is handled as a Surprise Round.

Violet had already stated that she’d hide the gun until the last moment. The GM says it’s a tough one to call, since all the gang can be aware of is a car speeding around the corner and in their general direction, so the Saves will have a penalty of 3. Neither the gang nor the boss make their Save versus Supernatural regarding Joel’s intentions. However, the boss had also been faster than Violet, so he is allowed a second Save to see if more danger is afoot. A 19! Their eyes meet as the car shoots around the corner and he sees the death in hers ...

Next, the Actions are declared in order from slowest to fastest:

(Joel, Initiative 3, 2 Tokens, 3 Vehicle Tokens) Joel’s Free Action is driving the car fast and safe past the bar while bringing Violet into a good position to shot. He gives Violet 1T Aid and 1T Damage, uses 2VT for Movement and 1 VT for Armor Class, cowering behind the wheel for cover.

(The Gang, Initiative 6, surprised) They keep getting ready to hit the road, completely unaware.

(Violet, Initiative 7, 3 Tokens, 1 Vehicle Token) Violet’s Free Action is her Attack (since her cover is blown), she is using 2T for Armor Class, 1T Aid for Joel’s driving and uses the 1VT she got as additional Damage Die (it’s a drive-by shooting, after all … the GM allows it).

(Jamal The Boss, Initiative 9, 3 Tokens) Jamal’s Free Action is Casting a Spell on Violet to confuse her. He spends 2T for AC ducking for cover (just in case) and 1T Movement to draw his gun while shouting at the Gang that shit is going down.

(Sam, Initiative 12, 4 Tokens) Sam skips his Free Action. He wants to be on top of the situation next round if this goes sideways. He gives Violet 1T Aid for her Save versus Supernatural (the Spell Jamal is preparing) and 1T Damage, just to be on the safe side. The remaining 2T go into Countering Jamal’s ducking for cover completely. He describes his support and counter as “Shouting at Jamal from across the street and giving him the finger”.

Example (cont. from p. XX): Initiative is resolved from fastest to slowest. Sam skips his Free Action and uses his Tokens to hinder Jamal from taking cover and supporting Violet’s Save versus Supernatural (by shouting and giving Jamal the finger). Since he is the fastest, no one can counter his Combat Actions and it works out as described.

Next up is Jamal. The Spell can’t be countered with Combat Actions, since it’s a Free Action, so this happens unchallenged a well. Violet feels like she’s getting lost in Jamal’s eyes and starts hearing drums and ecstatic singing in foreign voices in the distance. To avoid the effects of the spell, she’s entitled a Save versus Supernatural and has Sam’s support, so she rolls 1d20+1d4 … an 18 and a 3! So she shakes it off and lifts her rifle to take her shot while Jamal is checking out who strange guy across the street is and why he’s so mean to him. Doing that, he totally forgets to jump for cover (no additional AC), but he manages to warn the gang and gets his shotgun ready for next round.

Violet is next, but since Joel’s driving roll is necessary to get her into position (and might fail at that), Joel has to resolve his Free Action first (driving the car as fast as possible past the bar).

Joel has a DEX of 13 and a bit of a past as a Demolition Derby driver that brings a +4 to the Skill Test and there's another 1d4 Aid from Violet as well, so the roll is 1d20+13+4+1d4 versus a difficulty the GM declares to be 30 … and ends up rolling a 3 with the d20 and a 4 with the d4, which leaves him 6 points short (3+13+4+4=24). Not good, but no one is offering to sacrifice Funk for this, so the group accepts this as being a failure.

The GM declares that Joel miscalculates the turn, overwinds the steering wheel, botches his gear shifting and ends up rolling down the street towards the bar with a stalled motor. Violet’s shot will get a -2 as well, as this, if nothing else, annoys her as hell.

Still, this might work out after all, them still having surprise, so next is Violet with her pistol versus Jamal’s AC of 9. She gets to roll 1d20 with a +3 for her high DEX, a +1d4 due to Joel supporting her (he at least steers her enough into position to get a proper shot) and the -3 for Joel being an idiot driver. Her d4 turns out to be a 1, but the d20 is critical, a 20! And she is on a roll, as the d12 for Echo is a 12, which leads to the second Echo Roll (a d10) and ends the streak with a solid 8. That is another 20 to her result of 21 (20+1+3-3), all in all a brutal 41.

There was much rejoicing at the table.

After a critical result like that, a lot is happening, so the GM starts with the 20 and its Echo results: the 12 is the death sentence and also comes with an extra attack. Jamal is gone for good. Since he had his declared Actions already, the Voodoo Priest doesn’t even get a chance for his Dead Man’s Ten. The 8 has Violet in the highest possible, so she receives Double XP for learning something there, earns a permanent +4 circumstantial bonus against streetgangs. She also gets to describe this fatal blow and all gang members in sight have to make a Morale Check with a penalty of 4 to not flee in terror. It even leaves her with a Nickname (the group is undecided between “Voodon’t” and “Voodoo Chill”) and she gets to have an additional 1d6 with her next Initiative, with enough time to have a victory dance as well. The GM makes a note that the fey will give her a special little something for the beautiful work she has done here. A death so beautiful, generations to come will tell its tale …

Anyway, next for the Damage proper, as there are xp to be had for it. Her Small Ranged Weapon Mastery is at d6, Sam had spent a Token to raise that, so for this hit it is a d8. The height of the result determines the number of d8, so that’d be 6d8 with her result of 41. But she’d used 1VT for an additional Damage Die, so she rolls 7d8 for 35 points of damage. Jamal was a 5HD+2 Voodoo Priest with 21 Hit Points, which means 14 Points are left as Environmental Damage.

The player’s description: “So while Joel is driving like an idiot, working hard on making this mission a failure, a great calm comes over Violet as she lifts her pistol and focuses on that priest. That spell does nothing to her. If anything, it helps her focusing. Time slows down and she sees the paths of the bullets before they leave the barrel. Almost leisurely, she empties the gun into the guy. The giant bar window in the background explodes around his convulsing body and I’d say she even hits some neon sign behind the window, adding sparks to the whole scene (the GM allows it). But the kicker is that the Voodoo gangster is standing right next to one of those bikes and the tank is hit as well, which makes the bike go ‘BOOM’ and engulfs him in burning oil. So now he’s also burning and stumbling towards his gang before he falls down twitching. He’s not screaming anymore, as his lungs are burnt, but the black smoke rising above the burning body looks like the faces of some damned souls or something because he’s a Voodoo Priest, you know, and there is a wheezing sound no one can explain … That should do it.”

And indeed, none of them make their Morale Check, they all flee in terror.

The player also announces that she’d use her second attack to blow up one of the other bikes as well, at best one in the middle so that an explosion could have them go boom as well. Since this actually resolve the whole Combat, the GM decides that no more rolls are necessary for that to happen. Joel panicky restarts the car with Violet screaming into his ear to get moving while emptying another magazine into the row of motorcycles while Joel is making a more subtle exit. They accelerate past the bar while the bikes start showing some flames from the hail of bullets and as they make for the corner away from the bar, all of the bikes explode in a ball of light and smoke while Violet is having her victory dance in the car.

It earns Violet the INSTANT KILL and the CINEMATICS AWARD (see Character Progression, p. XX). Fun was had.

Fun was had, indeed ... [source]

So now you know why I call it a "Retroclone Mutant" ... it is the D&D RC but with a twist (my revised house rules, basically). Players will get awards for spectacularly bloody murder and grindhouse-worthy theatrics in what plays like an adult sixties urban fantasy setting. It'll also feature 7+ new classes with some tools to do your own and rules to integrate existing classes into the game as well as rules to alter existing modules and gaming materials into be67.

If that tickles your funny bone, this will be a treat for you. For sure. It's a bit more complex than your average "old school" D&D, but not more so than, say, proper AD&D would be if played RAW. I like it that way. I know I'm not alone.

Anyway, that's it for today. I hope this will generate some interest for the game. As always, I'll be happy to get some feedback on this, so what do you guys think?

------------------------ 

While we are at it: You can check out a free preview of Ø2\\'3||, that other rpg I wrote, right here (or go and check out the first reviews here). I'm still doing a sale on the game proper ...

If you already checked it out, please know that I appreciate you :) It'll certainly help to keep the lights on here! I'd love to hear about that, too.

Just look at that beauty ...

 ------------------------